Hamlet Streaming

During an Internet search before starting this blog I came across Hamlet Live.  I was intrigued enough to take a look to discover what exactly it meant.  It was a 2012 production out of Toronto that, in addition to being staged, was also streamed on demand on the Internet.  The actors were not paid for the performance; rather it was a labor of love for them.  Although the production (and VOD) had ended well before I took up this blogging mantle, I was able to view the performance through the good graces of the cast and producers.  (Thanks, Kyle!)

The version of Hamlet presented here is a much different take from any I have seen.  The story takes place in the year 2080.  The set, as much as I could see from the VOD production, is minimal, although not nearly as minimalist as other versions.  There is certainly a futuristic feel to it.  The costumes are of a modern persuasion as well, with Hamlet often in a sleeveless garment and Claudius in a military-esque suit.

As is typical, the script is edited to fit in a shorter running time, here roughly two hours.  The editing did not feel obvious or overdone.  Fortinbras does not appear.  The first scene with the players is reduced.  The gravedigger's scene is shorter, as is Osric's scene with Hamlet and Horatio.  Some of Hamlet's speeches were shortened.  That aside, though, there is still plenty of material left for the cast to perform.

There were many novelties with this production that caused it to stand out.  Hamlet refers to "our philosophy" when speaking with Horatio (I, v), a subtlety which emphasizes their relationship.  Rosencrantz and Guildenstern appear in an entirely new and grotesque conception--as a horribly mutated set of conjoined twins with a Germanic accent.  The ghost appears wearing a gas mask.  As in the NY Classical Theatre production that I described in a previous post, the ghost has the ability to control Hamlet's movements, causing jerky physical maneuvering reminiscent of a demonic possession.  The "players" are actually puppets, and The Murder of Gonzago is played as a twisted puppet play on a video screen.  The letters that Hamlet sends to Horatio and Claudius are actually video messages a la Skype.  Hamlet's confrontation with Gertrude nearly results in her death at his hands.  A confrontation between Gertrude and Ophelia does result in the latter's death, after Ophelia is stabbed by Gertrude.  Rosencrantz and Guildenstern need not wait for England to kill them; Hamlet takes care of that with a hunting knife on the boat ride.  The gravedigger, upon un-boxing (no digging here) Yorick's skull, removes a nail from the skull's nasal cavity and inserts it into his own.  Instead of interring Ophelia's body, she had been cremated (perhaps to conceal Gertrude's crime?).  Her ashes become a major issue as they are spilled on the stage and subsequently smeared by Hamlet on his own face instead of climbing into her grave.

The climax of the play represented a completely new take on the duel between Hamlet and Laertes.  This is no ordinary sword fight, but rather a new sport that the producers and cast call "Blood Falls."  It's an aerial version of a sword fight that takes place above the stage.  This required what had to be the most athletic Hamlet and Laertes that I have seen, as the scene demanded actual hanging above the stage while fighting and reciting lines.  It was an impressive sight.  Hamlet's final confrontation with Claudius was a much longer sword fight than the typical quick stabbing.

All in all, this was a very interesting adaptation of Hamlet.  Although the production has ended, the website is still active (as of this typing), and the Blog section presents some insight into the production.  It is worth checking out if the post above intrigues you at all.

"Hamlet, Cha-Cha-Cha!" (Part II)

Hamlet, Cha-Cha-Cha! was performed live in Spring 2013, by the Central New York Playhouse in Syracuse, NY.  Having read the play, I could not miss the opportunity to see it done on stage.  It did not disappoint.

The company's venue is a converted store in a mall.  They do a great job of using the space, and they continue to improve it.  The set was minimal, but it served its purpose well.  Although the sound was a bit on the low end of the volume dial for the performance that I saw, the space is small enough to hear what is being said.  (I saw another production in the same space and there were no sound issues.)

The play itself was gloriously overacted.  To an extent, it fit the script.  The play is raucously hilarious, and the actors took it that way, doing a very good job.  Unfortunately, though, the playwright, Monk Ferris, wrote that the play should be performed straight so that the humor will work.  Overplaying it cut into the humor a bit.  I did laugh at many things, but probably not as many as I could have.

The play ran fairly closely to the script.  The scene involving Yorick was omitted, perhaps for time constraints.  One major change, though, was Horatio.  While he is characterized as "an amiable sponge," this production portrayed him as flamboyantly gay.  It was way over the top.  In fact, a new concluding scene was written, in which Horatio takes the crown of Denmark for himself.  He tries on the King's crown, but it does not fit.  Gertrude's crown fits perfectly, though, and thus Denmark has a new queen.  I did not find any need to rewrite the role, and I thought it actually detracted from the production.

Overall, the production was enjoyable.  It is an interesting and amusing take on Hamlet, and it is one worth seeing if it ever comes to a theatre near you.

"Hamlet, Cha-Cha-Cha!" (Part I)

I came across this title when I saw that a local company was performing it.  Before seeing the production, I decided to do a bit of research first, as I had never heard of this one.  (Warning:  Spoilers follow.)

Hamlet, Cha-Cha-Cha! is a musically comedic take on Hamlet written by Monk Ferris.  Satire, farce--call it what you will.  The location and time period remain the same as the original.  Most of the characters from the original play are here as well.  There is one notable change:  Hamlet's Wittenberg chums are now Rosie Krantz and Gilda Stern.  In addition, there is a chorus, to back up the numerous musical numbers.

The curtain rises at the wedding feast with Hamlet, the Prince of Denmark, Ophelia, his softich "main squeeze," and Horatio, "an amiable sponge" on stage.  In what becomes a running gag, Horatio and Ophelia spend an inordinate amount of time looking for the buffet table or filling themselves from it.  Otherwise, the situation is familiar:  an untimely death, an o'erhasty marriage, a spectral appearance.  The action, though, is interrupted with (and accentuated with) song.  For example, Hamlet and the ghost of his father perform a duet on "That's the Spirit!"

The play continues with soliloquies, a "play within a play," song, dance, food and humor galore.  Poor Polonius meets his end.  Rosie and Gilda head to England with Hamlet, but in a twist they manage to outsmart the English authorities.  Ophelia goes for a swim and is rescued by "some group called Save The Whales."  Her reappearance provides a prelude to a duel, a poisoned goblet, plenty of dead bodies...and one final musical number, of course.

This is a wonderfully humorous variation on Hamlet.  It manages to take itself seriously while lampooning its precursor.  The musical numbers add a new twisted dimension to the action.  If you have the chance to see this done live, take advantage.  I did...but more on that another time.

Hamlet the Obese?

A critical excerpt by E. Vale Blake, circa 1880, brings a new element to the discussion of Hamlet, one which could make for very interesting casting some day.  With the ubiquitous discussions of public health, it is even timely.  Hamlet's psychological problems had a physical cause--he was fat!

The author bases his assertions on literal translations of Shakespeare's text, coupled with scientific analysis.  His primary evidence is Gertrude's line at V, ii, 300:  "He's fat and scant of breath!"  From this, Blake offers several other lines which could be understood to be discussions of Hamlet's weight.

• "to grunt and sweat under a weary life" (III, i, 85)
• "too, too solid flesh" (I, ii, 135)
• "in this distracted globe" (globe meaning a corpulent person) (I, v, 104)
• "to shatter all his bulk" (II, i, 106)

And so forth...

I find his review far-fetched to say the least.  It would make for an interesting variation on the Hamlet theme, though.  Imagine a production in which Hamlet becomes the poster child for healthy eating and exercise, complete with public service announcements!

From "The Impediment of Adipose," Popular Science Monthly, XVII (May 1880).

Benedix on "Hamlet"

The first entry in the book Hamlet:  Enter Critic is from Roderich Benedix, circa 1873.  The critical excerpt is rather pointed and, in places, laugh aloud funny.  Toward the end of the selection is a quote that is relevant to a discussion of performances of Hamlet.

"That it is not [the] piece itself particularly which impresses the public is evident from the fact, that for several decades the play has been given in different places in different shapes.  Every one who has undertaken to alter the piece has picked out such parts as he considered especially effective, and left out other portions....  The fact that a piece has admitted of so many alterations shows how very loosely it is constructed."

From Die Shakespearomanie (Stuttgart, 1873)

Hamlet On The Move

The April 2010 production of Hamlet by the New York Classical Theatre had the most inventive staging of any that I have seen.  The play was performed in New York City's World Financial Center.  It was not tied down to one stage, though.  The action of the play moved throughout the complex--atria, staircases, hallways.  As the cast moved, so, too, did the audience move to follow them.  It was a very interactive performance, as the action took place among the audience at times.  The "play within a play" occurred in a lobby that served as a theatre in the round.  I watched as Hamlet and Ophelia took up a seat next to me, giving me a very clear vantage point of "country matters."

The novelty of moving became a drawback to the production, though.  The play became (and felt) excessively long, due to the constant upheaval.  As soon as the audience got comfortable (as much as possible while sitting on a hard floor), off we would go to another location.  And this was no small audience, either.  The production was free--a blessing and a curse.  It appeared that some families used it as a night out, complete with very young children in tow.  Moving a large audience into areas not designed for them left some scenes cramped and others with poor sight lines to the action, unless you ran from one location to the next.  It was a nice idea on paper, but it did not work out too well in practice.

The script was edited in order to account for the time lost in transitions.  Oddly, the play began with a narration describing the early action of Act I, as if it were a previous episode of a TV serial that we had missed ("Previously on Hamlet...").  The action of the evening itself began with the "To be" soliloquy, and then the play moved back into Act II action.  It was as if the director wished to hook the audience early by using the most famous speech; instead, it felt misplaced.

Another edition had to do with the ghost of Hamlet's father.  Due perhaps to the traveling nature of the production, the ghost did not appear.  Rather, young Hamlet voiced his father's words as if he were possessed, accompanied at times by strange bodily movements.  It was Exorcist Regan McNeil-esque--wondrously strange.

The sword fight finale was well choreographed and well performed.  Regrettably, though, it had been a long evening and this viewer was ready to depart Elsinore for more comfortable surroundings, so I was not able to give it my full attention.

Overall, I compliment the New York Classical Theatre on a novel and well-executed production.  I wish that my reflection on it were more timely as I might have had better recall of the particulars of the play.  Even so, I am glad to have seen it, as it is probably one production the likes of which I shall not look upon again.